common_risk_faced_by_company

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid both A&B 3 8.8 8.8 8.8
both A&C 4 11.8 11.8 20.6
Business value risk 5 14.7 14.7 35.3
Intellectual risk 10 29.4 29.4 64.7
Legal risk 4 11.8 11.8 76.5
offshore personnel 1 2.9 2.9 79.4
risk
project risks 7 20.6 20.6 100.0
Total 34 100.0 100.0

Hw_do_u_rate_risk_in_org
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid High 14 41.2 41.2 41.2
Moderate 14 41.2 41.2 82.4
slight 4 11.8 11.8 94.1
Very 2 5.9 5.9 100.0
likely
Total 34 100.0 100.0
 Responsible_identifying_risks
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid Both A&B 2 5.9 5.9 5.9
Both D&B 3 8.8 8.8 14.7
Business IT 13 38.2 38.2 52.9
Analyst
IT Director 4 11.8 11.8 64.7
Project Manager 8 23.5 23.5 88.2
Test Manager 4 11.8 11.8 100.0
Total 34 100.0 100.0

quality_techniques_organization_use
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid Defect Repair 7 20.6 20.6 20.6
Review
Fagal Ispection 5 14.7 14.7 35.3
Other 4 11.8 11.8 47.1
Quality Review 13 38.2 38.2 85.3
Statistical Sampling 5 14.7 14.7 100.0
Total 34 100.0 100.0

riskreview_monitoring
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid Daily 6 17.6 17.6 17.6
Monthly 9 26.5 26.5 44.1
weekly 19 55.9 55.9 100.0
Total 34 100.0 100.0
 disaster_recoveryplan_outsourcing
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid Dont Know 5 14.7 14.7 14.7
No 10 29.4 29.4 44.1
yes 19 55.9 55.9 100.0
Total 34 100.0 100.0

measures_identify_and_controlRisks
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid Dont Know 7 20.6 20.6 20.6
No 9 26.5 26.5 47.1
yes 18 52.9 52.9 100.0
Total 34 100.0 100.0
 Correlations
common_risk
_faced_by_c Hw_do_u_rat
ompany e_risk_in_org
common_risk_faced_by Pearson 1 .848**
_company Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 34 34
Hw_do_u_rate_risk_in_ Pearson .848** 1
org Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 34 34
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.849 2

Correlations
Qualitystand
ards_organis diffrnt_prjct
ation_use _undertaken
Qualitystandards_orga Pearson 1 .905**
nisation_use Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 34 34
diffrnt_prjct_undertak Pearson .905** 1
en Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 34 34
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
 Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.949 2

Correlations
disaster_reco
practices_eS veryplan_out
CMP sourcing
practices_eSCMP Pearson 1 .939**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 34 34
disaster_recoveryplan_ Pearson .939** 1
outsourcing Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 34 34
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.883 2

Correlations
Qualitystand quality_tech
diffrnt_prjct ards_organis niques_organ
_undertaken ation_use ization_use
diffrnt_prjct_undertak Pearson 1 .905** .916**
en Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 34 34 34
Qualitystandards_orga Pearson .905** 1 .861**
nisation_use Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 34 34 34
quality_techniques_org Pearson .916** .861** 1
anization_use Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 34 34 34
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.951 3

Correlations
common_risk Responsible_i
_faced_by_c Hw_do_u_rat dentifying_ri
ompany e_risk_in_org sks
common_risk_faced_by Pearson 1 .848** .863**
_company Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 34 34 34
Hw_do_u_rate_risk_in_ Pearson .848** 1 .955**
org Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 34 34 34
Responsible_identifyin Pearson .863** .955** 1
g_risks Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 34 34 34
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.928 3
 Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence Interval
Std. Std. Error of the Difference Sig. (2-
Mean Deviation Mean Lower Upper t df tailed)
Pa Responsible_identif .176 .797 .137 .454 .101 1.292 33 .205
ir ying_risks -
1 common_risk_faced
_by_company

Paired Samples Statistics

Std. Std. Error
Mean N Deviation Mean
Pair 1 Responsible_identifyin 2.71 34 1.031 .177
g_risks
common_risk_faced_by 2.88 34 1.493 .256
_company

5.0 Analysis of Data

Identifying and analysing risk factors which are associated with Infosys, IBM and CSC and
how they mitigate these risks associated with offshore outsourcing to India. This analysis
helps in organising and accumulating the summarised data into illustrative or visual
display. The display of data in-turn helps in comparing the elements of the data and for
further exploration. Data display helps to draw conclusions.

Analysis is concerned with answering some research questions which helps in comparing
the literature review and the returned answers for the research questionnaire from
various people who are involved at IT Outsourcing companies. The survey for this project
was done in two techniques Questionnaire and interviews. The following analysis is
prepared from the responses collected from the questionnaire.

The responses received from the samples were put into Statistical Package for Social
Sciences (SPSS) in order to analyse the data, the result which has been gained is properly
summarised and correlated depending on the data type (Brace et al. (2006).

A detailed analysis of the questionnaire is discussed in the following pages.

Question 1: What type of offshore outsourcing project does your company undertake?
In this question the respondent can select multiple options to answer the question. In
response to this question the author investigated the kind of projects that the organisation
undertakes; and it is important for three software houses to know the kind of projects that
these organisations are involved in order to determine the risks associated with these
three software houses. The respondents from the organisations replied that 26.5% of their
business projects are related to software development, 32.4% of their projects are about
Information Technology Enable Services (ITES) about 20.6% as maintenance and20.5%
others.

Table 1

Differnt_prjct_undertaken

Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid Both A&B 6 17.6 17.6 17.6
ITES 11 32.4 32.4 50.0
Maintenance 7 20.6 20.6 70.6
Not applicable 1 2.9 2.9 73.5
software 9 26.5 26.5 100.0
develop
Total 34 100.0 100.0

Question 2: what quality standards do you maintain in your organization?

Responses says that organizations 55.9% follow Capability Maturity Model Integration Level
5 (CMMI Level 5), 20.6% of responses suggests that the organizations follow ISO 9000
standards, 11.8% on CMM, 8.8% as TICKIT and others are 2.9%. Over all the responses
indicates these three organizations obtained top level in the charts of quality standards.

Table 2

Qualitystandards_organisation_use
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid CMM 4 11.8 11.8 11.8
CMMI 19 55.9 55.9 67.6
ISO 9000 7 20.6 20.6 88.2
Other 1 2.9 2.9 91.2
TICKIT 3 8.8 8.8 100.0
Total 34 100.0 100.0
Question 3: Which of the following quality techniques does your organization use?

The Responses were then replied saying 38.2% of responses say Quality Review, 20.6% says
that Defect Repair Review, 14.7% says Fagal Inspection and Statistical Sampling and other
says 11.8%.
Table 3

quality_techniques_organization_use
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid Defect Repair 7 20.6 20.6 20.6
Review
Fagal Inspection 5 14.7 14.7 35.3
Other 4 11.8 11.8 47.1
Quality Review 13 38.2 38.2 85.3
Statistical Sampling 5 14.7 14.7 100.0
Total 34 100.0 100.0

Question 4: Do you practices eSourcing Capability Model for Service Providers (eSCM-SP)?
The respondents from the organisations replied that 50% of them practice eSCM-SP, 17.6%
of them says they don’t practice eSCM-SP and others is 32.3%.

Table 4

Frequenc Valid Cumulative

y Percent Percent Percent
Valid No 6 17.6 17.6 17.6
Yes 17 50.0 50.0 67.6
Don't now 5 14.7 14.7 82.4
Not 3 8.8 8.8 91.2
Applicable
Other 3 8.8 8.8 100.0
Total 34 100.0 100.0

Question 5: What type of common risks faced by your company in their offshore
outsourcing?
Risk is associated with each and every process in the offshore outsourcing. Common risks
associated with offshore outsourcing describe these challenges very well in identifying the
types of risks. The respondents from the organisations replied that 29.4% of them is
associated with Intellectual property risk, 20.6% of them says Project risks, 14.7% says
Business value risk and others says is 11.8%.

Table 5

common_risk_faced_by_company
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid both A&B 3 8.8 8.8 8.8
both A&C 4 11.8 11.8 20.6
Business value risk 5 14.7 14.7 35.3
Intellectual risk 10 29.4 29.4 64.7
Legal risk 4 11.8 11.8 76.5
offshore personnel 1 2.9 2.9 79.4
risk
project risks 7 20.6 20.6 100.0
Total 34 100.0 100.0

Question 6: How do you rate these risks in your organization?

Initially this questionnaire is about to rate the risks in order to minimise the risks of
different companies but as the research is focused on three companies. The Responses
were then replied saying 41.2% of responses says risk is high, 44.2% says that risk is
moderate and other says 14.7%.
Table 6

How_do_u_rate_risk_in_org
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid High 14 41.2 41.2 41.2
Moderate 14 41.2 44.2 82.4
slight 4 11.8 8.8 94.1
Very 2 5.9 5.9 100.0
likely
Total 34 100.0 100.0

Question 7: Who is responsible for identifying the risks in your organisation?

Initially this questionnaire is about to identifying the risks in order to minimise the risks of
different companies but as the research is focused on three companies. The Responses
were then replied saying 38.2% of responses says Business IT Analyst is responsible, 23.5%
says that Project Manager, 11.8% says Test manager and IT director and other says 14.7%.
Table 7

Responsible_identifying_risks
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid Both A&B 2 5.9 5.9 5.9
Both D&B 3 8.8 8.8 14.7
Business IT 13 38.2 38.2 52.9
Analyst
IT Director 4 11.8 11.8 64.7
Project Manager 8 23.5 23.5 88.2
Test Manager 4 11.8 11.8 100.0
Total 34 100.0 100.0

Question 8: How often is the risk review and monitoring undertaken in your
organisation?

As the review is required at every stage of the project hence the risk review and
monitoring is needed while mitigating the risks, 55.9% says weekly review is required and
26.5% says monthly review and 17.6% suggests daily review is required.
Table 8

riskreview_monitoring
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid Daily 6 17.6 17.6 17.6
Monthly 9 26.5 26.5 44.1
weekly 19 55.9 55.9 100.0
Total 34 100.0 100.0

Question 9: Do you have any disaster recovery plan for outsourcing?

This question was asked to know whether organizations have a disaster recovery plan or
not, employees of both the organizations responded positively more than 55.9% says they
have disaster recovery planning. 14.7% of the responses suggest that some employee don’t
even know about disaster recovery planning, 29.4% says they don’t have disaster recovery
planning and 4.3% as others.
Table 9

disaster_recoveryplan_outsourcing
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid Don’t 5 14.7 14.7 14.7
Know
No 10 29.4 29.4 44.1
yes 19 55.9 55.9 100.0
Total 34 100.0 100.0

Question 10: Do you any measures to identify and control Risks?

As every business has risks and vulnerabilities, this question is asked to know whether
these companies have specific measure to identify and control the risks. 52.9% of the
responses depicts that companies has taken measure to identify and control the risk where
as 20.6% says they don’t have any knowledge about this and 26.5% says they don’t have
any measures.

Table 10

measures_identify_and_controlRisks
Valid Cumulative
Frequency Percent Percent Percent
Valid Don’t 7 20.6 20.6 20.6
Know
No 9 26.5 26.5 47.1
yes 18 52.9 52.9 100.0
Total 34 100.0 100.0

Correlation

Correlation is used to relate the two questions. A value of –1 shows that the two in
question are perfect negative correlation and therefore would prove to be insignificant
and +1 show that the two questions are perfect positive correlation.
 5. Q what type of common risks faced by your company in their offshore outsourcing?
6. Q How do you rate these risks in your organization?

Table 11

Correlations
common_risk
_faced_by_c Hw_do_u_rat
ompany e_risk_in_org
common_risk_faced_by Pearson 1 .848**
_company Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 34 34
Hw_do_u_rate_risk_in_ Pearson .848** 1
org Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 34 34
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The above test shows that the correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Indicating that the above two questions are related and can be used to test the
hypotheses. Hence the correlation between the two questions is 0.848 which are
significantly correlated to each other.

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.849 2
As the value from the above test is .849 which nearest to +1, the above two questions are
have strong relationship according to the reliability test.

1. Q What type of offshore outsourcing project does your company undertake?

2. Q What quality standard do you maintain in your organization?

Table 11
 Qualitystand
ards_organis diffrnt_prjct
ation_use _undertaken
Qualitystandards_orga Pearson 1 .905**
nisation_use Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 34 34
diffrnt_prjct_undertak Pearson .905** 1
en Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 34 34
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

The above test shows that the correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Indicating that the above two questions are related and can be used to test the
hypotheses. Hence the correlation between the two questions is 0.905 which are
significantly correlated to each other.

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.949 2
As the value from the above test is .949 which nearest to +1, the above two questions are
have strong relationship according to the reliability test.

4. Q Do you practices eSourcing Capability Model for Service Providers (eSCM-SP)?

9. Q Do you have any disaster recovery plan for outsourcing?
Table 12
 Correlations
disaster_reco
practices_eS veryplan_out
CMP sourcing
practices_eSCMP Pearson 1 .939**
Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 34 34
disaster_recoveryplan_ Pearson .939** 1
outsourcing Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000
N 34 34
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
The above test shows that the correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).
Indicating that the above two questions are related and can be used to test the
hypotheses. Hence the correlation between the two questions is 0.939 which are
significantly correlated to each other.

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.883 2

As the value from the above test is .883 which nearest to +1, the above two questions are
have strong relationship according to the reliability test.
1. Q What type of offshore outsourcing project does your company undertake?
2. Q What quality standard do you maintain in your organization?
3. Q Which of the following quality techniques does your organization use?
Table 13

Correlations
Qualitystand quality_tech
diffrnt_prjct ards_organis niques_organ
_undertaken ation_use ization_use
diffrnt_prjct_undertak Pearson 1 .905** .916**
en Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 34 34 34
Qualitystandards_orga Pearson .905** 1 .861**
nisation_use Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 34 34 34
quality_techniques_org Pearson .916** .861** 1
anization_use Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 34 34 34
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Therefore these three variables are correlated and its value is 0.905, 0.916 and 0.861
respectively. This shows a close Pearson correlation coefficient positively correlated with
each other and can be used to test the hypotheses.
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.951 3

As the value from the above test is .951 which nearest to +1, the
above two questions are have strong relationship according to
the reliability test.

5. Q What type of common risks faced by your company in their

offshore outsourcing?
6. Q How do you rate these risks in your organization?
7. Q Who is responsible for identifying the risks in your organisation?

Table 14

Correlations
common_risk Responsible_i
+ _faced_by_c Hw_do_u_rat dentifying_ri
ompany e_risk_in_org sks
common_risk_faced_by Pearson 1 .848** .863**
_company Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 34 34 34
Hw_do_u_rate_risk_in_ Pearson .848** 1 .955**
org Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 34 34 34
Responsible_identifyin Pearson .863** .955** 1
g_risks Correlation
Sig. (2-tailed) .000 .000
N 34 34 34
Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
**. Correlation is significant at the 0.01 level (2-tailed).

Therefore these three variables are correlated and its value is 0.848, 0.863 and 0.955
respectively. This shows a close Pearson correlation coefficient positively correlated with
each other and can be used to test the hypotheses.

Reliability Statistics
Cronbach's
Alpha N of Items
.928 3

As the value from the above test is .928 which nearest to +1, the above two questions are
have strong relationship according to the reliability test.
 Table 15

Paired Samples Test

Paired Differences
95% Confidence Interval
Std. Std. Error of the Difference Sig. (2-
Mean Deviation Mean Lower Upper t df tailed)
Pa Responsible_identif .176 .797 .137 .454 .101 1.292 33 .205
ir ying_risks -
1 common_risk_faced
_by_company

The T-test has been performed on the data using SPSS, which is one of the many statistical tests, to
understand how to interpret and report the results of statistical analysis of the dissertation.

From the above table 15 it is clear that the first mean is higher than the second. Hence the T-value is
positive. As the T-value is 1.292 far from 0 (in this case +ve), it is the evidence for the alternative
hypothesis that there is correlation between them.
 Paired Samples Statistics
Std. Std. Error
Mean N Deviation Mean
Pair 1 Responsible_identifyin 2.88 34 1.493 .256
g_risks
common_risk_faced_by 2.71 34 1.031 .245
_company